TRUCKEE MEADOWS COMMUNITY COLLEGE
PROGRAM/UNIT REVIEW
DEAN’S RECOMMENDATION
PROGRAM/UNIT REVIEWED: Radiologic Technology
Self Study Committee Chair(s):
Deborah Baker, Coordinator
School: Sciences
Year of Review: 2011-12
Date Submitted to PURC: April, 2012
Dean’s findings of strengths and weaknesses of the program/unit:
The Radiologic Technology program provides a high quality education to students that lead to an AAS
Degree and certification by the American Registry of Radiologic Technologists.
Strengths:
 Student enrollment in the program is very stable.
 The program regularly achieves a 100% pass rate on the AART certification exam.
 Student retention is consistently high, averaging 95% over the last seven years.
 Student completion rates (graduates) are 90% over the last five cohorts.
 Faculty members in the program are highly qualified with occupation experience in industry.
Weaknesses:
 Course assessment has been lacking with only 6 out of 20 courses assessed over the past three
years.
 Timely reporting is a significant issue within the program. The program review was delayed from
its original due date multiple times.
 The program faces some significant curricular upgrades as industry begins to move toward digital
imaging.
 The program advisory board has not met on a regular basis.
Summary action recommended for program/unit: Continue Program/Discipline.
Recommendations for development strategies and anticipated time lines:
I concur with many of the recommendations (in italics) from the Program Unit Review Committee.
Similar recommendations are lumped into common categories.
Advisory Board involvement:
● We recommend the self-study be reviewed by external constituents outlined in PUR Handbook
and their comments and recommendations be submitted for consideration by the Vice President
to be addressed in the first progress report.
Since the self-study committee did not include representation from the community, this
recommendation should be completed within six months of the Vice President’s final findings.
Job Placement
● .Further explanation is needed on the status of the job market and program graduate and
employer surveys/information. Find alternative survey method or feedback mechanism that is
more effective.
● We recommend deeper analysis of the factors contributing to the student employment issue. The
committee recognizes that current economic conditions have impacted student employment;
however, would active advisory committees, national accreditation, and modern equipment assist
with higher employment opportunities? We recommend these strategies be investigated
Since the elimination of the JRCERT accreditation it is important that the program documents
that its decision was correct. Monitoring student placement is an excellent vehicle to do so.
Funding
 We recommend that the program provide specific recommendations and potential funding
sources to the Vice President in its first progress report.
 We recommend the program provide cost analyses of the identified physical resource needs as
well as strategies to meet the needs:
 There is no clear articulation of the need for an additional classroom—ie, given the student load
and allocated space, how does the RAD TECH program compare to other high demand programs
and their space allocations? What is the program’s strategy to acquire additional space?
● The program clearly needs new radiographic equipment, but there are no cost estimates. Other
than the TMCC Foundation “trying to find funding,” there are no identified strategies
(community grants, Perkins grant money, etc.) to meet this need. Perhaps the advisory board
could be utilized to address this issue
These recommendations are particularly important as it relates to the inclusion of additional
digital equipment. I do disagree with the PUR committee’s recommendation that the program
should compare space allocations with other high demand programs. It is the occupation itself
and the number of students served that determines space needs. An excellent example is that it
would take a much large space to work on a diesel truck than a car yet the students served would
be the same.
I disagree with the following recommendations (in italics) from the PUR committee.

Identify and implement entrance qualifications other than GPA (or in addition to) that more
accurately predict student success.
The program achieves a 95% retention rate, 90% graduation rate, and 100% certification rate. I
am not sure what better predictors the committee is looking for.
●
We recommend that the program explore the potential for program growth utilizing differential
tuition based on market demand.
Current Board of Regent’s policy does not grant the ability for lower division programs to utilize
differential tuition. Therefore community colleges cannot offer differential tuition unless the BOR
changes its interpretation of the policy. So, while this is an excellent recommendation to which I
wholeheartedly agree, it is impossible for the program itself to address this issue.
●
Given the demand for the program, articulated in the Executive Summary, it’s clear that the
demand for the program exceeds the resources to meet demand. There are no strategies to meet
that demand other than to revise the admission process; we recommend the development of such
strategies.
This recommendation assumes that when there are more students trying to get into the program
than what the program accepts, then demand must be high. The key to a successful career
program is the balance that it maintains with job placement in the community. If a program
overproduces graduates then employment suffers and demand goes down. Thus the earlier
recommendation that the program take a more detailed look at the job market potential is a better
recommendation than this one. Overall, the program is best when it achieves equilibrium with the
job market.
●
We recommend the program provide analysis of the staffing needs as well as strategies to meet
the needs: It’s clear that with just two full-time faculty in a high demand area, the program
needs more full-time faculty, especially with the coordinator’s upcoming retirement. What are the
projected costs, and what are the strategies to address this issue? There is no data to substantiate
the assertion that part-time clinical instructors “deserve a raise”; nor are there strategies to
address the perceived pay gap.
The recommendation to increase the full time faculty because the coordinator is retiring is a moot
point. It is logical to assume that that position would be replaced. The size of the program does
not currently justify additional faculty. The student to faculty ratio is currently 14:1. The second
full time faculty member in the program has already offered to assume the role of coordinator
upon the retirement of the coordinator so the college would simply be recruiting a full time
faculty member as a replacement position. The issue of part time salaries is a college issue not a
program issue, but I do concur that all “deserve a raise”.
Assessment
While the PUR made no particular recommendations for assessment other than to note that assessment
only started in 2011; it is clear by the lack of assessment activities that the program must place a higher
priority on achieving and analyzing its own assessment measures. The program must develop and stick to
its five year plan as proposed.
Finally, the committee expressed disappointment that the program dropped JRCERT accreditation and
questioned the wisdom of that decision. I want to assure the committee that the decision was well thought
out. I am attaching an explanation of that decision to this document.
Identify resources necessary for implementation of recommended development strategies:
A key resource for the suggested recommendations from the PUR and the Dean will be the Advisory
committee. The committee can assist the program in its market analysis, the equipment needs, and the
program assessment.
I recommend that the program consult the Foundation via its Capital Campaign for resources for new
equipment and that it work with Theresa Golden of Facilities to analyze space needs.
Institutional Research can assist the program in looking at market data and student placement.
The Dean’s office will provide support through his advocacy for differential tuition and will assist the
program in meeting the recommendations of this report.
Describe impact of recommended development strategies on School planning:
Any suggestions for changes in the facilities or installation of equipment will have a huge impact on
facilities planning.
Describe impact of recommended development strategies on program/unit faculty:
Increasing assessment activities and planning for new equipment will have a significant impact on
faculty. The recruitment of a replacement faculty for the retiring director will also have an impact on the
workload of the remaining faculty member.
Dean, School of Sciences
Ted Plaggemeyer
April 14, 2012